If the PSTN could overnight switch from TDM to IP, everyone would be much happier for it; there's a lot of pain and expense going back and forth between SS7, IP, wireless, and even older stuff like FG-D. Unfortunately, we have a long, painful transition to undergo: * On the technology side, carriers have to update, upgrade, replace, and some time just trash existing (expensive) hardware infrastructure of all different flavors. There's a lot of money involved there. * On the business side, carriers have to figure out how to convert their inter-carrier billing and revenue agreements that are all based on channel and CPM models into...whatever exactly it is that's going to replace it. And like it or not, all of the upstarts are leveraging (or just taking advantage of) a model that allows them to exist at the expense of the incumbents so those who stand to lose their revenue base are understandably dragging their feet. * On the regulatory side, the regulations have to be adapted to account for new forms of telephony and distribution, and these things change very slowly because politics is involved. To add injury to the process, states and localities derive revenue from the taxable transactions. So if those taxes go away...something has to replace it. We all know how easy it is to raise taxes in this current environment so you can figure on some real pain there. * New carrier technology (cable and FIOS) which is not currently open to competition is creating an interestingly skewed playing field as some areas get a ton of new investment (most suburban and some urban areas) while others (largely poor and rural) get skipped. Nobody really knows how these things are going to change, but there's a lot of really nervous people all across the incumbent and mature CLEC space as they try to adapt their technology, processes, workforces, and other stuff to meet the perceived demand. Cheers, David. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Kenny Sallee wrote:
My 'tone' in email is somtimes misinterpreted (so sorry about that) - I was just 'thinking out loud' as I like to put it.
One thing you did mention is that telco's don't like the move to IP - what are their arguments against it?
On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 7:39 AM, Alex Balashov <abalashov at evaristesys.com <mailto:abalashov at evaristesys.com>> wrote:
I didn't say that the presence of IP removes all the complexity, nor that interconnection without TDM and/or SS7 is possible--at least, for CLECs, but also many ITSPs that buy TDM in order to do access that is actually reliable and interoperable.
My intended point, which should have perhaps been made clearer, was only that the use of more IP - where feasible and practical - in the place of a circuit-switched alternative can add fluidity to the network that can change the CAPEX formula for redundancy in a more favourable direction.
It's not magic and it certainly won't solve all the problems that motivate the original question.
-- Alex Balashov Evariste Systems Web : http://www.evaristesys.com/ Tel : (+1) (678) 954-0670 Direct : (+1) (678) 954-0671 Mobile : (+1) (678) 237-1775
------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ VoiceOps mailing list VoiceOps at voiceops.org https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/voiceops